Improving the interface between a snowboard and a snowboarder raises several construct considerations. Designers address these considerations in the details of the snowboard, the snowboard binding, and the snowboard boots. Desirable characteristics may include limited space between the snowboarder's foot and board, a secure attachment to the board, some medial and lateral ankle mobility while maintaining proper attachment and secure feel, vibration and shock absorption, traction of the boot on the binding, a lightweight system, safety, and adjustability. Keeping the snowboarder's foot close to the board improves the rider's feel for the board and riding surface and increases the board's responsiveness as the snowboarder moves their foot. A secure attachment to the board not only enhances the rider's safety, but also effects an efficient transfer of forces which assists the snowboarder in maintaining proper control. A certain amount of medial and lateral movement of the snowboarder's ankle and foot is desirable for stunts and general maneuvering. Limiting rearward movement of the lower leg and limiting boot movement away from the board are also desirable and, at times, compete with lateral mobility concerns. Vibration absorption becomes important as snowboarders ride on hard-packed terrain with increased speeds. The snowboarder may also require shock absorption, especially with jumps and stunts. Traction between boot and binding improves control and results in an efficient transfer of forces to the board from the snowboarder's foot. A lightweight system decreases fatigue and improves performance. Varied terrain and individual rider preferences necessitate the ability to adjust both the angle of the binding and the space between bindings. Snowboard manufacturers and designers have attempted to address all of the above concerns. A conventional binding is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,356,170 (Carpenter, et al.). This binding includes a baseplate with sidewalls extending upwardly therefrom and a highback pivotally attached to the sidewalls. Additionally, Carpenter's binding contains straps that extend from one sidewall to the other, with buckles to secure or release the snowboard boot from the binding. Several snowboard companies sell bindings similar to those disclosed in the Carpenter, et al. patent. The adjustability of these bindings is provided by a center disk through which screws extend to engage inserts within the snowboard. The central disk may be rotated to change the angular orientation of the binding relative to the board; it also may be moved fore and aft and into other inserts placed within the snowboard. The binding may be somewhat light in weight if constructed of appropriate plastic or other lightweight yet strong materials. Other concerns are more fully addressed by alternative designs and additions to the basic set-up shown in the Carpenter, et al. patent.
For example, a patent to Young (U.S. Pat. No. 5,409,244) is directed toward a baseless snowboard binding. In this patent, Young eliminates the central disk for attachment to the snowboard, but instead provides flanges extending from the sidewalls to secure the binding to the board. This keeps the user's foot closer to the snowboard and may decrease the weight of the binding. However, the binding lacks the adjustability of conventional bindings that have disks or step-in snowboard bindings with disks. Furthermore, as with the Carpenter et al. binding, the Young binding adds no vibration absorption or shock absorption. In order to address vibration and shock absorption, snowboard designers and, more prominently, ski designers, have used rubber or other viscoelastic layers between the binding and the board or ski. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,520,406 (Anderson, et al.) uses a gasket (49) between the metal frame of the step-in snowboard binding and the snowboard. The gasket provides some vibration absorption, especially if made of rubber or other elastic material. Other snowboard binding manufacturers have placed rubber, or material softer than the binding frame, on top of the snowboard frame between the binding frame and boot sole. However, all these solutions lift the boot further from the snowboard and do little to absorb shock, while not absorbing as much vibrational energy as would be the case if these materials were thicker. Of course, thicker material would further elevate the rider from the board.
Thick, elastomeric materials have been used with skis, as evidenced by the Mayr patents (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,143,395 and 5,199,734). Mayr uses an elastomer damping material between the binding and ski, with a binding mounting plate on top of the damping material. In this manner, vibrations can be absorbed in the elastomer without transferring them to the boot and, thus, foot of the skier. Vibration absorption was also addressed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,232,241 (Knott, et al.). In this ski, the binding mounting plate was allowed to move relative to the rest of the ski through the use of an elastomer layer sandwiched between two cores. Other examples in ski art include U.S. Pat. No. 4,896,895 (Bettosini) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,026,086 (Guers, et al.). Transferring this technology to snowboards would necessitate lifting the user's foot away from the board in order to adequately obtain vibration absorption, shock absorption, and traction, while maintaining adjustability and medial and lateral movement. Whereas elevated bindings may enhance ski maneuvering, snowboard riding requires a closeness between the user's foot and board.
Therefore, a need exists for a snowboard binding that does not elevate the rider's foot much further off the board than a conventional binding yet provides significant vibration and shock absorption. Medial and lateral movement, traction, light weight, and adjustability can also be provided with a secure, safe attachment to the board through the present invention.